Captain Jack Sparrow
Anti-cryptominer
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
- Messages
- 561
- Reaction score
- 118
One thing that terrifies me as a gamer is where the gaming market seems to be heading.
I pretty much hate anything and everything to do with cloud services, and the term 'whatever-as-a-service' constitutes profanity to me. While I agree that Sony's recent launch of PS Now is a good concept, I feel that cloud-based gaming services like these should compliment conventional gaming, not aim to eventually replace it.
But what are your thoughts on this topic? I haven't seen this topic discussed much around the web.
As I absolutely despise cloud-based gaming, I will kick things off with maximum bias!
- Capt. Jack Sparrow.
I pretty much hate anything and everything to do with cloud services, and the term 'whatever-as-a-service' constitutes profanity to me. While I agree that Sony's recent launch of PS Now is a good concept, I feel that cloud-based gaming services like these should compliment conventional gaming, not aim to eventually replace it.
But what are your thoughts on this topic? I haven't seen this topic discussed much around the web.
As I absolutely despise cloud-based gaming, I will kick things off with maximum bias!
- Reliant on Internet connection
The game software is not being rendered on your own local hardware, the game software is actually running on a server located somewhere in a data center. That means that if your wireless connection drops, or if the data center's network backbone provider experiences difficulties, it's game over!
- Input and response lag
I don't think this is feasible. Many games (especially first-person shooters) require blazingly fast input times, as these games are usually fast paced. Because the game software is running on a server located far away in a data center, a command from your controller device has to be sent to the data center, processed, rendered, H.264 encoded, sent back to your client device and finally displayed on screen. This would introduce an epic amount of input and response lag. Your base latency (the time taken for a single packet sent from your system to reach the data center) would be doubled, because it has to do a round trip.
- Rural Internet connections
If you live in a rural village area like me, you will probably not have the luxury of fibre-optic cables running into your property to supply the Internet connection. Where I live, we were lucky to get a fibre-to-the-cabinet connection, because Virgin Media actively refuse to cable our street (despite running cables to pretty much everywhere else in the village).
Some people are even unluckier, as they are stuck with ADSL. This is probably the worst Internet connection anybody could have nowadays, it's almost like having the modern day dial-up equivalent (I have witnessed circumstances where dial-up is actually still faster than certain ADSL connections!). Therefore, poor souls with slow ADSL rural connections will not be able to make use of any cloud-based gaming services.
Some people are even unluckier, as they are stuck with ADSL. This is probably the worst Internet connection anybody could have nowadays, it's almost like having the modern day dial-up equivalent (I have witnessed circumstances where dial-up is actually still faster than certain ADSL connections!). Therefore, poor souls with slow ADSL rural connections will not be able to make use of any cloud-based gaming services.
- Image resolution and picture quality
It's probably a safe bet that games will run at 30 frames per second with a resolution of 720p (or 1080p if you're really lucky). That's already inferior to even a mid-range gaming PC. Quite obviously, the picture quality is further reduced when the renderer output is encoded to H.264 in order to transmit the video stream. As great as H.264 is, it isn't perfect and artifacts can quite often appear.
- No benefit for gamers with powerful systems
It doesn't matter if you've got a low-end laptop with Intel's HD Graphics. If it has a hardware H.264 decoder, you can play! While this is great for users who can't afford more powerful systems, it's bad news for those (like me) who have invested the time and money to make a powerful gaming rig. We would lose out, because the game software isn't running on our local system, it's running in a data center. That also means you have no control over graphical settings, it'll look and perform exactly the same on a £200 laptop and a £750+ gaming PC.
- No physical copies
Like, seriously. Do I really have to explain this one?
- Corporate Overlord
One of PC's biggest advantages over console is the lack of a service 'overlord', or centralized management company who calls the shots with regards to gaming. As great as Xbox Live and Playstation Network are, they are a closed model, which limits what you can do (e.g. subscription required to play multiplayer games).
- One word (or three if you expand the acronym): DRM
**** off. Publishers will get so horny that they'll mess their knickers over this. Smaller independent game developers will hate this. And so will the consumers. DRM encourages corporate greed.
- A new dawn of anti-competitive exclusive titles
I can see many games being exclusive to only one cloud-based gaming service provider. Which brings me to my final point...
- Expensive. Very expensive
You'll still pay the same amount each month, even if you played no video games in the entire month. You'll also pay the same amount, regardless of whether you play one video game, or twenty. As every service provider will have their own exclusive games, you'll have to subscribe to all of them to avoid being missing out on exclusive titles, which will work out to be ridiculously expensive and not worth it.
In conclusion, conventional gaming with proper hardware is better in virtually every possible way imaginable.
- Capt. Jack Sparrow.
Last edited: